Mr. Crackerz wrote:Today was a game that showed how Lee was missed. Outrebounded 62-37 is ridiculous.

Not only that, but it appears we've found Draymond Green's kryptonite: a more athletic hustle player. Green usually thrives because he outworks his opponent, but when he runs into a motor like his, we are all reminded of how limited Green is, physically, compared to most NBA players.

Kenneth Faried demolished Draymond; not that Lee would have done much better. But if we're entertaining Kawakami's article proposal - considering Green over Lee because Green is better at defense - last night was a major black eye on that line of reasoning. Faried's usually pretty feeble on the offensive end and he finished with 18/17/1 in 32 minutes. Not to mention, Draymond's opposing box score was pretty terrible for a starting PF: 4/2/2 in 24 minutes.

Everyone with a brain: 1Kawakami: 0

I wonder if David Lee has nude photos of Kawakami's wife or something... why has Tim K had it out for DLee since the moment they signed him? Lee called Kawakami's reporting of him "biased" in a recent interview and, at this point, it's pretty tough to dispute that. Mention Lee around Tim K and the guns come out. Definitely seems personal at this point, considering Lee is indisputably one of the 6 best PF's in the game and puts up numbers at his position that the Warriors haven't seen since 1994.

LMAO!

Here is why Tim is always riding Lee..

1) He suffers from grass is always greener syndrome2) He suffers from the delusion that 20 & 10 double double machine all star PF's can be had for $8 - $10mil. Can we just remember for one second that David Lee was an all-nba player last year. The dude fits in perfectly with this team.3) He can't admit when he's proven wrong so he needs to desperately cling to any straw of justification for his opinion

idk if it's boredom or what, whether it's Mark Jackson, David Lee, or Klay Thompson, just seems there always needs to be a scapegoat on the W's. As far as Lee, find me a player who can do all the things he can - post scoring, rebounding, passing, leadership, double doubles, all star etc, - and you probably won't find that player for very cheap. When he has matched up vs guys like Blake Griffin, Aldridge, Kevin Love, etc, he's held his own. Would I take an upgrade? Sure. But it's not like those guys mentioned have cheap contracts or are all-NBA defenders.

I'll never be a fan of trading important pieces of the team just for salary cap space, unless you're in rebuild mode or the need to resign other players has forced your hand. My thinking is if you're in win-now mode, put out the best possible team on the floor regardless of contract. It's not like (with good teams) guys are looking to their left and to their right on the court, and seeing dollar sign icons about each player's head, they're just trying to win games with the best possible team. Is Curry worth more on the basketball court because he has a cheap contract? At some point it becomes purely basketball. Whether the guy is making $500k or $20mil, the measuring stick is does he help you win games or not and how does he fit on the team?

Are Warriors better without David Lee for the remainder of this season? No. We need Lee in these playoffs. Green, Speights, O'Neal and Barnes aren't going to cut it.

Are Warriors better without David Lee next season? Possibly. But only if we can trade him for someone better like Kevin Love. I think this off season is the right time to make a move. I don't think the front office want to sit back and just enjoy this ride. This teams window of opportunity is only small so we need to win now. Barnes has had a horrible season but I still think other teams would value his potential. If we keep him for another season and he stinks again, then his trade value will be gone. I'd really like to see the FO pursue a trade for Kevin Love for Lee and Barnes. We may need to throw someone else into the deal to make it work but I would definitely do it. I agree with Migs that the T-Wolves have no bargaining power as they need to trade to get something back otherwise they'll lose Love for nothing in free agency. If we could have Love and Curry and surround them with Bogut, Iggy, Klay and Green I think we'd be a top 3 team.

Ringo wrote:Are Warriors better without David Lee for the remainder of this season? No. We need Lee in these playoffs. Green, Speights, O'Neal and Barnes aren't going to cut it.

Are Warriors better without David Lee next season? Possibly. But only if we can trade him for someone better like Kevin Love. I think this off season is the right time to make a move. I don't think the front office want to sit back and just enjoy this ride. This teams window of opportunity is only small so we need to win now. Barnes has had a horrible season but I still think other teams would value his potential. If we keep him for another season and he stinks again, then his trade value will be gone. I'd really like to see the FO pursue a trade for Kevin Love for Lee and Barnes. We may need to throw someone else into the deal to make it work but I would definitely do it. I agree with Migs that the T-Wolves have no bargaining power as they need to trade to get something back otherwise they'll lose Love for nothing in free agency. If we could have Love and Curry and surround them with Bogut, Iggy, Klay and Green I think we'd be a top 3 team.

Great analysis!

Also, this trade would work for both teams as well as the players involved (win-win).

As much as I'd like to think that Barnes will get his head straight, which seems like the #1 problem, to get Love, I'd trade him now along with Lee, but that should be enough and no other player should be added, though in saying that I'd give Blake, as he is likely to retire very soon, that is if he is resigned, in order to trade him.

Love would be a nice addition and last night showed again how talented he is by going off on us, though the thing with him still is his lack defensively. Still, an improvement on Lee and should be enough to make the team a top 3 team yes, so agreed on that. Love would resign with us as well, likely having made the playoffs for his first time and seeing championship contention.

David Lee is a good player; however, nobody can deny that he is also a defensive liability; poor defending the block, which is not OK; allows for his defensive assignment to beat him to the basket on a break, never OK.

Yes, David Lee can light up a scoreboard as well as get double digit rebounds; both are good. Unfortunately, as much as I like David Lee's scoring, his propensity to turn the ball over on offense along with his below-average defense, really hurts this Warrior team.

He gets it done and the team continues to do well with him on the roster. If the team beats the Clips in the present series and he is a big part of that, he is only tradeable for a superstar PF, like Love. Lee has his flaws but he is a top 10 PF, at times top 5.

I don't see how the team could be better without him, unless they replaced him with someone better. If you replace him with a player that does more for the team than he does then yes they'd be better. But the idea that the team simply plays better without him is lost on me. Any time you have a quality player to add depth to your roster, it is making the team better. Especially a team player and leader like Lee. I know he's not strong defensively but if you are going to say that his defensive weaknesses outweigh his offensive contributions you're crazy. I realize there are better power forwards in the league, but are any of them available and can they afford them? Doubt it.

If Bogut's healthy he and Lee are a good combo. Lee makes up for Bogut's lack of scoring, and Bogut makes up for Lee's defensive liabilities. Both of them rebound very well and pass very well. The point is that if you have two big men, one can be more of a finesse player as long as the other is more of a physical enforcer type. You can get away with it. Unfortunately the flaw in this equation for the Warriors is Bogut's susceptibility to injury. At some point they are going to have to find a big man who plays big and physical and doesn't get hurt all the time.